Disqus - Friends of gishdog

Re: Server Side Javascript Continued – Node.js (plus example)

britg — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 16:39:41 -0000

Hey John - from your console output, it looks like you are making requests to the wrong script.

"example.js:28 ..."

The name of the script, if you used the same copy from the github repo, should be 'gamelobby.js'

Let me know if that helps!

Re: Server Side Javascript Continued – Node.js (plus example)

britg — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:47:44 -0000

Very cool, will watch its progress on github :) I like the Sinatra-esque lightweight approach.

Re: Server Side Javascript Continued – Node.js (plus example)

britg — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:34:49 -0000

True, I plan to make some updates, the first of which is to use POST on the /join URL and enforce it. Also, I will implement a reaper process to clear stale joins.

Re: Nginx Proxies with FirePHP

britg — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:30:22 -0000

And yes, I think Jack support is a great move for the project -- I think it'll find more adoption on Jack than Jaxer. Nothing wrong with Jaxer, but I have a feeling that Jack will be widely adopted going forward just because of it's WSGI/Rack approach.

Re: Nginx Proxies with FirePHP

britg — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:25:23 -0000

Very cool project you put together! I will definitely give it a try -- I'm finding that I can't live without FirePHP now. I'm sure that will carry over to my server-side JS projects and this sounds like the perfect solution. Cheers!

Re: Three Cheers for CakePHP Backwards Compatibility

britg — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 12:01:49 -0000

Yeah, I agree about ActionScript camel casing. Some languages just _feel_ like they should be camelcased and other _feel_ like they are underscored -- usually correlated to whether they are OO or not.

Re: Integrating CakePHP with bbPress - Part 1

britg — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 09:19:21 -0000

Well, my first approach when I get time to revisit would be to use the same
cookie mechanism i'm already using in my cake app - namely the cookie
handler. I usually dont rely just on Sessions for my user login, but set a
cookie also.

I would extend the Cookie handler built into cake to tap into the same
libraries that BBPress is using (either by duplication or inclusion), and
when I set my cake cookie I also set a BBPress cookie, and a session
variable if BBPress requires one.

Hope that helps - and yes, I apologize that I have not finished part 3 - it
kills me as well!

Re: It’s hard to like the PHP ‘Elite’

britg — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:25:28 -0000

Ouch, that's unfortunate that it got posted before you could finish your train of thought. I've redacted my "this guy doesn't get it" statement - the rest of your argument is a lot more thought out. Are you going to pub it on your blog? Won't get heard here.

Re: Integrating CakePHP with bbPress - Part 1

britg — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 11:18:20 -0000

No, unfortunately I haven't taken the time to finish this out or the project
that this was for! I really hope to revisit soon.

Re: The Winter Beer of 2008 - Michelob Winter’s Bourbon Cask Ale

britg — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:52:15 -0000

God yeah it's damn smooth and the hint of Vanilla is the kicker.

Re: Integrating CakePHP with bbPress - Part 2

britg — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 09:10:11 -0000

Thanks, yes I really intend to write part 3 - but unfortunately the project
I was doing this for has been put on hold for the moment!

Re: Who Google Chrome Affects the Most

britg — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 07:57:06 -0000

Haha, yes good points all around. I do agree that this is a good thing for
web developers in general because it does force Adobe to keep up with speed
and accessibility of ajax in flash.

In response to your Microsoft point - they don't necessarily have to adopt
Google's technology for V8 to have an affect on Adobe. Since MS and Google
are so competitive, I can see a scenario where Microsoft comes out with
their own new-fangled js engine that touts more and better features than V8
etc, etc. This will lead to the web tech conversation switching tone from
"ajax vs flash" to "google's js tech vs MS's js tech". This is bad for
Adobe.

I do agree with you that flash isn't going anywhere even in this scenario.
It's all up to Adobe and where they take the platform.

Re: Why Aptana is Quickly Becoming the Killer Stack

britg — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 08:55:11 -0000

Check out the response to the word wrap issue report here:
http://support.aptana.com/asap/browse/STU-534?f...

He explains how to turn on wordwrap.

Re: Using the Zend Framework in CakePHP

britg — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:43:26 -0000

Interesting - i guess the most extensible solution would be to check if
there is a semicolon and add it if there is not - like your case.
Thanks for sharing

Re: The Answer To Gaming Piracy Was Perfected Over a Decade Ago

britg — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 08:12:21 -0000

Online is the only answer to prevent piracy without compromising customer's computers/privacy/gameplay. It's fine that you don't like playing games online, but my point is that publishers should publish single player games with NO DRM and understand that there will be piracy. If they care about piracy, the only method to prevent it is to create a valuable online component to a game that only legitimatly purchased copies can connect to! Hobble the pirates, not the payers.

Re: Integrating CakePHP with bbPress - Part 2

britg — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 13:46:29 -0000

No problem! glad to help. Been slammed with other stuff and haven't been able to work on this project, but I'll definitely get around to writing part 3.

Re: Ok, Apple Not Stupid - The Have Just Turned Into “The Man”

britg — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 13:35:15 -0000

Interesting argument, and yes I agree the iphone platform is still in its
infancy. But, I see no reason why we can't take a look at now-mature
platforms (like the internet) and apply the some critical thinking. Namely,
walled gardens don't work (AOL, etc). Also, no matter how secure you think
you are - someone is always out there smarter and more determined than you
to break your security (DRM, etc).
So, Apple needs to allow applications like Big5 to roam free. If it's an
issue where they KNOW about security risks and just haven't fixed them yet,
then be upfront damnit - Dirk spent quite a lot of time on Big5 and got
absolutely nothing in return. There are other phonegap developers like
myself that are frustrated for him.

Re: Ok, Apple Not Stupid - The Have Just Turned Into “The Man”

britg — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:26:53 -0000

Haha, you're right - I probably will love the wild west of Android.

I agree that IE itself wasn't that important - but the concept behind it was - release an application that spawns innovation and fix the security holes when they arise. Windows is a nest for malicious software because they chose innovation over caution. But without that, the computer industry wouldn't be where it's at today, and Apple would have never been able to establish itself as the 'safe alternative' and the 'cool kid on the block.'

The funny thing is, I'm writing this from a macbook pro :)

Re: Apple Too Stupid to Understand Utility of Outside-The-Box Apps

britg — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 10:42:31 -0000

Thanks Dirk for shedding some light.

Re: Apple Too Stupid to Understand Utility of Outside-The-Box Apps

britg — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 18:12:40 -0000

Yeah, good points about the impact of 'limited utility'. Your last question
has scary implications, and if the answer is 'yes' I see the application
pool stagnating after a certain number of iPint's and 'Pull my thumb' apps
being released.

Re: Apple Too Stupid to Understand Utility of Outside-The-Box Apps

britg — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:56:43 -0000

If that is the case, Apple owes it to their developers to give us that type of explanation. I think there is a chance here the reviewer or team of reviewers just didn't think outside of the box, and decided that we don't need another web browser app.

If they really did understand the full implications of the app and denied it with a boilerplate response then it's not worth the time and effort to make a remotely innovative iphone application in my opinion.

Re: Apple Too Stupid to Understand Utility of Outside-The-Box Apps

britg — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 14:15:59 -0000

Saying Big5 is useless is similar to saying Firefox was stupid when it came out. Or, that any browser but Internet Explorer and Safari are stupid.

Here's the big secret - Big5 uses the exact same SDK as every other app. The SDK provides a component to access websites, called WebView, that lots of apps use, including Big5. The security risk in Big5 is the same security risk that any application that accesses a web site has!

Re: Apple Too Stupid to Understand Utility of Outside-The-Box Apps

britg — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:24:22 -0000

Wrong on every level - big5 uses exactly the same tools that every
other app uses!

Re: Apple Too Stupid to Understand Utility of Outside-The-Box Apps

britg — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:18:11 -0000

Very true and this is what scares me the most- not that the reviewers
are stupid but that they DO understand and are intentionally blocking

Re: Apple Too Stupid to Understand Utility of Outside-The-Box Apps

britg — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:37:46 -0000

Haha, ok I agree the headline was a bit over the top, but it just reads better than 'Some Team In Apple's Iphone App Review Department Is Too Stupid To Understand Utility of Outside-The-Box Apps".

Regarding your points - the first few steps of that messy process is meant to be alleviated by getting approved for the app store. If Big5 were a downloadable app, all a user would have to do is 1) open the app, 2) type in the web address just like in Safari.

You are probably right about apple censoring apps that act as another web browser for whatever reason. But, just compare that what Microsoft got in a lot of trouble for doing with Internet explorer in windows. Same exact situation.